SANT NARAIN MATHUR & ORS. versus RAMA KRISHNA MISSION & ORS.

Citation: [1975] 2 S.C.R. 188 · Decided: 27-09-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HANS RAJ KHANNA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

188 
SANT NARAIN MATHUR & ORS. 
A 
v. 
RAMA KRISHNA MISSION & ORS. 
September 27, 1974 
[H. R. KHANNA, M. H. BEG ANo·v. R. KrusHNA IYER, JJ.] 
Practice and Procedure--Starement in the Hi~h Court judgment that certain 
B 
issues were conceded whether can be challenged before the Supreme Court parti-
cularly when it was IWt challen1<ed i11 the Leave Application and the Special 
Leave Petition-Permission to raise a new plea to be determined on what 
grounds. 
Dr. Chandan Singh had two sons Tegh Singh and Shamsher Singh and two 
daugh le rs Deva Devi and Lakshmi Devi Dayali Devi was the wife of Sham-
sher Singh. Dr. Chandan Singh execuied a will in 1897, Chand.in Singh and 
Tegh Singh died. Thereafter Shamsher Singh executed a will in 1944 in 
C 
favour of Raina Krishna Mission arid making provision for the residence and 
maintenance of his wife and sister. Mr. Mitra the executor obtained a probate 
of the will in spite of the opposition of Dayali Devi. The Division Bench of 
the High Court confirmed the· grant of probate by the Single Judge. Therefore, 
Da)lali Devi filed a suit for a declaratton that' she was the owner of the pro-
perties left by her husband. The said suit was dismissed. The High Court 
dismfased the itppeal. 
In the meanwhile, a suit for possession of the property 
bequeathed to Rama Krishna Mission was filed where Deva Devi was lmplead-
D 
ed as a defendant on her application. The Trial. Court awarded the decree for 
possession in favour ofr Rama Krishna Mission. Dayali Devi filed an appeal 
against that judgment in the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal 
in the High Court Deva Devi and Dayali Devi died. Four perso!ls including 
the appellants applied to the High Court to be substituted as legal representa-
tives of Dayali Devi on the ground that Dayali Devi had executed a will in 
their favour 2 days before her death. The High Court dismissed the appeal. 
The High Couri judgment mentioned that it was not challenged by the appellants 
E 
that a part of the bequeathed property was self-acquired property of Shamsher 
Singh and that Shamsher Singh had become full ow11er of the share of Tegh 
Singh. It was contended on b1:half of the appellant tha.t the observations in 
the High Court judgment about the concession are erroneous. 
HELD : The observation of the High. Court that certain findings were not 
challenged is unequivocal and it is difficult to believe that the Learned Judges 
of the High Court would erroneously say so. The same counsel who argued 
the appeal also filed the Application for Leave which is silent on the point. 
. F 
1 
Even in the Special Leave Petition filed in this Court no ground was taken that 
the observation of the High Court was incorrect. 
[193 E·HJ 
The contention that Shamsher Singh was owner of only t share of the 
estate of Chandan Singh after the death of Tegh Singh was not allowed to 
be raised for t!ie first time · in this Court. While disallowing the appellant to 
raise the contention this Court took into account .various facts including the fact 
that the plea is being set up by persons who admittedly had no relationship 
with Chandan Singh, Shamsher Singh or Dayali Devi. Another fact which 
G 
weighed with this Court is that the suit giving rise to this appeal was instituted 
more than 16 years ago. The suit instituted in 1958. was the off-shoot of the 
litigation which started in 1946 and it is time that a final curtain is drawn on 
the long litigation. The Court in this context observed : 
"Deva Devi and Dayali Devi, who claimed rights and interest in the 
propert~· is. dispute, are now no more. So is Capt. Mitra who was the party 
·arrayed agamst the two ladies in the litigation. It is time in our opinion. that 
we draw the final curtain on this long drawn litigation and not allow its 
H 
embers to smoulder for a further length of time, more so wh~n the principal 
cont~stants ha.ve all depHted bo·wing as ft were to the 
inexorable .Jaw 
of 
11:11\lre." [195 D-HJ 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
B 
s. N. MATHUR v. RAMA KRISHNA MISSION (Khanna, J.) 
18 9 .· 
CIVIL APPELLATE JUR~SDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 689 of 1973. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and Order dated the 
October 19, 1972 of the Allahabad, High Court in First Appeal No. 
360 of 1963. 
Sri Narain Andley, O. C. Mathur and D. N, Misra, for the appel· 
!ant. 
B. Sen, P. K. Chaterjee and G. S. Chatterjee, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KHANNA, J ,-'-This is an.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.